If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ. You may have to Register
before you can view/post in certain forums, we also restrict registered users from some forums
Upgrading your account and thus helping with the bounce server funds will solve this, our Private Members and Monthly Donators have FULL access to every part of the site.

Celtic won’t be gutted to lose their first game if it means they can win v rangers at parkhead

I thought that was the reason for the delay in announcing the games? Thought they might have had the Recent Firm game at least 2nd last or last game if that was the reason. We beat the dodgers and watch them panic.

Think I might nip over to Gorgie Farm and count some Chickens before they've hatched

If you enjoy reading the
content here, click the below
image to support our site.

vCash

1000

Mentioned

91 Post(s)

Tagged

1 Thread(s)

Quoted

5212 Post(s)

Rep Power

3803

Good news - 3 home games (tick)
- No midweek trail anywhere (especially Sheep Ville)
- Sheep at 3pm on a Saturday
- Killie go to Mordor and play the team they have
least success against first
- Gunts go to Mordor again

Good news - 3 home games (tick)
- No midweek trail anywhere (especially Sheep Ville)
- Sheep at 3pm on a Saturday
- Killie go to Mordor and play the team they have
least success against first
- Gunts go to Mordor again

Less ideal is playing the Lessers first but can't have it all.

I'm now thinking playing the lessers first might not be a bad thing. I fancy us to get something from the game. And if we do it won't half set us up nicely for the next 4.

Bit of a possible advantage us playing our second last game 24 hours after Aberdeen v rangers

Which is ludicrous.

As is the fact Hearts are returning to Ibrox for a third time and, thus, "losing" a home gate.

Look… I get it. I do. We hate Hearts, they hate us, and their misfortune is our joy-butter. But the reality is that it’s unfair on Aberdeen to have a habitually bad game 24 hours before we know what we have to go out and do after it, and it’s unfair on Hearts to have to take a third trip to Ibrox when Scottish teams are all dependent upon gates. I understand that playing at Murrayfield helped their gates earlier in the season, but I’m not sure how much of that they actually pocketed given the additional costs that were incurred in whatever rent agreement they signed.

Equally, we all wanted them to upgrade their bear pit of a stadium – which also costs money (don’t forget the seats next time, though, eh?) that they’re not rolling in.

It’s embarrassing for our entire game that this is going on, and it’s worse that there’s absolutely no reason for it.

And the problem is that the powers that be will hide behind the fact that it’s an unusually competitive race for second place and, thus, a better European draw for the clubs involved.

But that’s what we all $#@!ing want.

The game thrives on the competition we’re seeing for second place this year, and the goal MUST be that it becomes the rule rather than the exception. And if we achieve that, then what? Every year we have a set of post-split fixtures that shaft certain teams? European football is effectively a windfall that clubs can spend freely because it’s not likely to be part of their general turnover.

And the sums aren’t small, either. Getting to the second qualifying round, which isn’t beyond Hibs, Aberdeen or ‘Rangers’ is worth pretty much £500,000 without including gates. Should one of those clubs get to the group stages after an extremely favourable draw, we’re talking about another £667,000 in prize money alone… Again, not including gates. In other words, were Hibs to get to the group stages of the Europa League, it could potentially be worth over ten million. Even the more realistic aspiration of hitting the second or third qualifying round would see us netting between three and four million.

It’s big money.

And our association is $#@!ing up the fixtures that could potentially lead to it.

@Zellviren, quite - also bears pointing out that this would be a competitive race without a split being involved. With a three point spread and just a few fixtures to go, this would be tight regardless.

Fixtures are the best we could have asked for. I’m in Benidorm for a Stag trip next week so missing the Smellies game.

Definitely cut the Huns allocation though. The demand will be there from our fans to fill a good part of the south at least, especially going into the game with still something to play for. IIRC did we not cut the Huns allocation for one of the play-off games a couple of year back?

@Zellviren, quite - also bears pointing out that this would be a competitive race without a split being involved.

Exactly.

There's absolutely no reason for the split, and it throws up all sorts of other existential problems when the race is tight and teams get the short end of the stick. "Yeah, but, TV money" isn't a good enough excuse, given that TV money (and, by extension, other sponsorships) are $#@!ing rubbish in Scotland, so the only thing that really needs protected is gates.

This is why the SPFL, and the SPL before them, will continue to resist a 16-team league. It's because it only provides 15 home gates a season, three less than the current set up assuming the split doesn't throw your entitlement to a home gate out the window, which is worth over a million to clubs like Hibs, Hearts and Aberdeen. It's money they can't afford to lose.

So why the $#@! can't we have a top league of 20 teams, and a second league of 22?

This guarantees 38 fixtures for the Premiership, and gives more home gates to the teams below that. It also generates additional cash for those below the top tier who don't get habitual visits from the big clubs.

It's such an obvious solution, it solves the financial problem with home gates, it's more lucrative to lower ranked teams, and Scottish fans want bigger leagues. There's also the potential benefit to player development in Scotland when clubs aren't routinely threatened with relegation in a cut-throat, ten-team system that could see financial implosion follow a bad run of form at the wrong time.

As a result, don't expect it to happen. Instead, expect this farcical state of affairs to continue because our game is ran by a gaggle of complete $#@!ing muppets.

There's absolutely no reason for the split, and it throws up all sorts of other existential problems when the race is tight and teams get the short end of the stick. "Yeah, but, TV money" isn't a good enough excuse, given that TV money (and, by extension, other sponsorships) are $#@!ing rubbish in Scotland, so the only thing that really needs protected is gates.

This is why the SPFL, and the SPL before them, will continue to resist a 16-team league. It's because it only provides 15 home gates a season, three less than the current set up assuming the split doesn't throw your entitlement to a home gate out the window, which is worth over a million to clubs like Hibs, Hearts and Aberdeen. It's money they can't afford to lose.

So why the $#@! can't we have a top league of 20 teams, and a second league of 22?

This guarantees 38 fixtures for the Premiership, and gives more home gates to the teams below that. It also generates additional cash for those below the top tier who don't get habitual visits from the big clubs.

It's such an obvious solution, it solves the financial problem with home gates, it's more lucrative to lower ranked teams, and Scottish fans want bigger leagues. There's also the potential benefit to player development in Scotland when clubs aren't routinely threatened with relegation in a cut-throat, ten-team system that could see financial implosion follow a bad run of form at the wrong time.

As a result, don't expect it to happen. Instead, expect this farcical state of affairs to continue because our game is ran by a gaggle of complete $#@!ing muppets.

I concur re the SPLit, it is f'uckin useless, and should be gubbed. Problem being, clubs vote to keep it.

I am a long time advocate of the 16 team league.
Dont know if UEFA have changed rules in recent years but, a 30 match league was the minimum requirement for Champs League involvement. A 16 team league allows for that.
I also feel that clubs such as Hibs, Guntz, Dons, etc may have a better chance of success in the league, rather than if it was dragged out longer. SDBs have far bigger squads and can sustain long term injured players more than any team.

The season-wide format is a simple one I've always stood by ...

no midweek league matches(that takes care of 30 saturday/sundays, and more recovery time for injured players)
no winter shutdown
LC played on saturday/sunday to a finish
SC matches only midweek replays

I would argue that any gate losses from a 15 v 19 home match league would be balanced by not having to play a league game on a freezing tuesday night in Dingwall/Killie/Inversneckie/Aberdeen, or even a midweek league cup match at ER against Dumbarton, or other sh'ite like that
Games played at weekends tend to bring bigger crowds, simple as that. It may even cost some clubs to stage a midweek game due to a crap turnout.

I'm now thinking playing the lessers first might not be a bad thing. I fancy us to get something from the game. And if we do it won't half set us up nicely for the next 4.

I’m the same Kenny, I fancy us tae beat them, they’ve no been firing on all cylinders for a few weeks. And the dodgers might no be too fussed as that will give them the chance tae hump the the hun and win the league.😉

Think I might nip over to Gorgie Farm and count some Chickens before they've hatched

However, I still think, even then, we can beat them. But it'll take a monumental performance, make no mistake, because Celtc will be wanting this put to bed - people seem to be forgetting that if they don't, there's always the chance that they then don't​ beat the Huns, allowing them a fleeting moment of gloating.